Neighbor installed IR night hunting webcam facing my garden and property

68 posts in this topic

4 hours ago, Acton said:

What are you scared about?

 

I cannot sleep at the thought of him chaining his daughter to a chair, forcing her to watch footage of me doing nothing for a couple minutes a day on my garden's chair, putting the footage on repeat and whipping her with a replica shirt of Lothar Matthäus with a number 10 from Italy '90. The very fabric of my existence is trembling in fear at this haunting chant of death.

6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, OpRez said:

Between you and me, my private life is nothing in particular that I need to hide

This isn't the point though. The camera could be used to work out whether you or anyone else is at home or not, to track you movements and/or to plan a break-in and/or damage your property whilst your are apparently absent. 

Our neighbour did just that to us, the camera was pointing directly at our main entrance. One of us went out, but the other was at home when the neighbour came down, but he hadn't worked that much out and got a surprise when the shutters came up and returned to his flat. :rolleyes: 

To get the cameras removed (yes, cameras plural - there were at least 3 in different places at one point) we had to get our lawyer involved as well as the Police several times. This was not the first time he had installed cameras. Before we moved here he had also filmed the street.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, lunaCH said:

This isn't the point though. The camera could be used to work out whether you or anyone else is at home or not, to track you movements and/or to plan a break-in and/or damage your property whilst your are apparently absent. 

Our neighbour did just that to us, the camera was pointing directly at our main entrance. One of us went out, but the other was at home when the neighbour came down, but he hadn't worked that much out and got a surprise when the shutters came up and returned to his flat. :rolleyes: 

To get the cameras removed (yes, cameras plural - there were at least 3 in different places at one point) we had to get our lawyer involved as well as the Police several times. This was not the first time he had installed cameras. Before we moved here he had also filmed the street.

 

Totally agreed on your point. The idea is not that you get a free-pass just because I am a "tolerant" or "permissive" person. There are rules and they have to be followed. If I may ask: how did it "end"? Meaning.. what's the current status of your "let's call it relationship" between you and the neighbor? I am curious to know if you eventually moved out, stayed and stonewalled or got your neighbor to friendly realize his wrong and now he's living happily ever after. I don't mean to be nosy with your life (I'd come put a couple cameras, if I wanted that :)) but it's plain curiousity to know the aftermath.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OpRez said:

how did it "end"

Regarding the cameras, the main one which was pointing and recording our flat door was removed after a lawyer's letter was sent to them. It was only the guy anyway, the woman was against the cameras and had already told her partner in the past (before we arrived) to stop placing cameras as you could see the street on them. :rolleyes: 

As for the other two cameras - they were taken away by the Police and one found to be empty (hadn't recorded as far as the Police could make out), the other not working. Though if I understand the rules - even placing a dummy one without a sign could be illegal. Obviously there were no signs and we were never consulted about any of the cameras. 

We assume that the main one he still has with him and of course had the recordings of the front door and surrounding common area on its card, is now back in operation, but hidden from our view. 

In our flat there is always someone home, so whether he is recording/watching our door or not, he isn't able to find a moment when no one is at home in our flat. 

Whether he received a fine from the report we made about him we don't know. 

The guy in question suffers from a form of dementia and is often aggressive, including towards his domestic partner. He is also an alcoholic. :wacko: 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, lunaCH said:

In our flat there is always someone home, so whether he is recording/watching our door or not, he isn't able to find a moment when no one is at home in our flat. 

 

How do you know that that is his intention? How would he get in?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, lunaCH said:

Regarding the cameras, the main one which was pointing and recording our flat door was removed after a lawyer's letter was sent to them. It was only the guy anyway, the woman was against the cameras and had already told her partner in the past (before we arrived) to stop placing cameras as you could see the street on them. :rolleyes: 

As for the other two cameras - they were taken away by the Police and one found to be empty (hadn't recorded as far as the Police could make out), the other not working. Though if I understand the rules - even placing a dummy one without a sign could be illegal. Obviously there were no signs and we were never consulted about any of the cameras. 

We assume that the main one he still has with him and of course had the recordings of the front door and surrounding common area on its card, is now back in operation, but hidden from our view. 

In our flat there is always someone home, so whether he is recording/watching our door or not, he isn't able to find a moment when no one is at home in our flat. 

Whether he received a fine from the report we made about him we don't know. 

The guy in question suffers from a form of dementia and is often aggressive, including towards his domestic partner. He is also an alcoholic. :wacko: 

 

Thanks for this! Interesting and definitely opening up to give me a bit more of an understanding even if all situations are obviously different.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, fraufruit said:

How do you know that that is his intention? How would he get in?

As he has already tried to break in twice and also as I said he came down once to try to dome something thinking no one was there when actually there was and got a surprise. 

 

He would get in by breaking through the door. On the outer door he used rocks to try to bash through it. On another door (internal connecting door from a common room) he used a metal bar. Neither attempt was successful. Using rocks on the outer door would have taken him hours, if not days. :wacko: 

On the inner door he could have managed to break through using the bar though, if he had have been allowed to continue. It still would have taken a while, but being an inner door it is hidden from view from passersby etc.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fraufruit said:

Sounds like a right nutter. Do you feel safe now?

Of course he is. 

We feel safer than when we did back when it happened, merely because he has not done much more since then, as he knows he is risking being taken away by the Police if he tries anything else and he knows this because we call them every time he does something.

 

The criminal aspect of this aside, he now has the legal action in progress against him for the damage caused, which is so far just over €13'000 including legal fees. He damaged two doors and the heating system. One of the doors was only installed last year and had replaced an old door, which alright needed replacing, but he wrecked it so that it was unsafe and made the replacement necessary, - now it needs doing again, after less than a year. 

The deadline has passed for him to pay and he hasn't - the next step is lawyer taking it (him) to court - not sure if it is going to be a Klage or a Mahnbescheid route though, - not even sure if the latter option is possible in such a case. Have asked the lawyer, should get an answer in the next few days hopefully. :rolleyes:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crazy stuff. Out of the same curiosity: in cases like these do you have to have money to pay your lawyer? I mean.. I realize asking this might sound stupid but.. it's a case that seems to be tilted clearly in your favor. Still, do you need money on the spot (or monthly, for example) to keep your lawyer hired and operational to keep the situation so that you know you are proceeding to get justice? My fear is that - if you have no money to pay your lawyer from the get go - you won't have a chance to keep all the details under control to get full justice or at least try (I realize you can obviously still count on calling the police and they will still prosecute etc etc but it's a different thing than your lawyer who covers your interests).

 

 

 

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, lawyers need payment! If you have Rechtschutz insurance, then, usually, your fees are covered . Depending on how long you have had insurance, and maybe other reasons.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, OpRez said:

Crazy stuff. Out of the same curiosity: in cases like these do you have to have money to pay your lawyer? I mean.. I realize asking this might sound stupid but.. it's a case that seems to be tilted clearly in your favor. Still, do you need money on the spot (or monthly, for example) to keep your lawyer hired and operational to keep the situation so that you know you are proceeding to get justice? My fear is that - if you have no money to pay your lawyer from the get go - you won't have a chance to keep all the details under control to get full justice or at least try (I realize you can obviously still count on calling the police and they will still prosecute etc etc but it's a different thing than your lawyer who covers your interests).

We don't have legal insurance. We paid the lawyer when he billed us or in the case of the upcoming court fees, we'll pay that in advance.

Nearly all of the lawyer's costs and court fees are included in the case against the neighbour, so should we win, we ought to get nearly everything back that we have paid out, i.e. the lawyer's fees, the court fees, the cost of replacing the two doors and the amount paid out to repair the heating. 

The building insurance refused to pay out as nothing that happened was covered under the policy.

Our private household insurance has not made a final decision as, unsurprisingly, they have never had a case like it. :rolleyes: They could well pay something out, even if partial. I am not sure how this will affect the case against the neighbour, as in theory he is meant to pay since the damage was deliberate.

 

I don't agree that without a lawyer you haven't a chance of keeping all details under control. We have done this ourselves. In fact it is your job and in your best interests to do this. The more information you collect, the more you can pass on to a lawyer to bolster your case.

 

If you don't have legal insurance and you don't have money for a lawyer, you can probably apply for legal aid for a lawyer to write you the letter. You will have to prove that your income is low and/or that you are on benefits and/or that you have no savings, wealth etc. etc. 

 

If you do not qualify for legal aid but you don't appear to have wealth, the lawyer may ask for a deposit up front. This was not the case with us as the lawyer knew we were homeowners.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks @lunaCH, this is very useful to know, just in case, to give me some perspective. I wish you all the best.. crazy how insurances also play their typical cards. It does not help in sedating my typical lack of trust against any form of insurance.. it's easy to pay them, it's hard to get them to pay (although in this case it might look clear and smooth that deliberate damage is not covered and has to be assessed by whoever dished out the damage.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, OpRez said:

I wish you all the best.. crazy how insurances also play their typical cards. It does not help in sedating my typical lack of trust against any form of insurance.. it's easy to pay them, it's hard to get them to pay.

Thank you. I believe the decision of the building insurance to be correct. What happened is simply not covered in the policy. 

 

The household insurance though is another matter. It has been almost 4 months since the incidents in question and we have no final decision concerning a payout. We are pursuing it via this insurance as well as in a legal case against the neighbour himself at the same time as we simply don't know who is going to pay (or who legally has to pay) what. Moreover even if there is a payout from the insurance, it will never be the full amount, so we would expect the neighbour to cover the remaining amount plus all legal costs incurred. 

 

The household insurance initially said they would pay for 'the entrance door', but not the heating repair. They then backtracked when I clarified for them that it was actually two doors and said they need to look into it more closely (probably as they then realised the amount of damage was significantly larger) and sent someone out to inspect it. 

This person said they would look into again the possibility of paying for the damage to the heating, but they said that doubt there could be a payout for that or either door - due to the precise wording of the policy and how it happened, but that they would continue to look into it.

The latest we heard is that they need to speak to the Police about what happened as well - which is fine as everything that happened was reported to the Police at the time. 

We are going to pursue this until all possibilities have been exhausted both with the insurance and the neighbour to try to get all of this money back.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, lunaCH said:

Thank you. I believe the decision of the building insurance to be correct. What happened is simply not covered in the policy. 

 

The household insurance though is another matter. It has been almost 4 months since the incidents in question and we have no final decision concerning a payout. We are pursuing it via this insurance as well as in a legal case against the neighbour himself at the same time as we simply don't know who is going to pay (or who legally has to pay) what. Moreover even if there is a payout from the insurance, it will never be the full amount, so we would expect the neighbour to cover the remaining amount plus all legal costs incurred. 

 

The household insurance initially said they would pay for 'the entrance door', but not the heating repair. They then backtracked when I clarified for them that it was actually two doors and said they need to look into it more closely (probably as they then realised the amount of damage was significantly larger) and sent someone out to inspect it. 

This person said they would look into again the possibility of paying for the damage to the heating, but they said that doubt there could be a payout for that or either door - due to the precise wording of the policy and how it happened, but that they would continue to look into it.

The latest we heard is that they need to speak to the Police about what happened as well - which is fine as everything that happened was reported to the Police at the time. 

We are going to pursue this until all possibilities have been exhausted both with the insurance and the neighbour to try to get all of this money back.

You might want to check your liability insurance for a reverse liability clause.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, lunaCH said:

The latest we heard is that they need to speak to the Police about what happened as well - which is fine as everything that happened was reported to the Police at the time. 

We are going to pursue this until all possibilities have been exhausted both with the insurance and the neighbour to try to get all of this money back.

 

 

How come the police did not arrest your neighbour for breaking and entering, or criminal damage? Seems there was plenty of evidence not to mention whatever might be on the camera.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jeba said:

You might want to check your liability insurance for a reverse liability clause.

We don't have this either, unless it is in the policy of another insurance (building or home contents) and we don't know about it. The lawyer has not asked us if we have it specifically. 

If I understand correctly such a clause is used when the person you are claiming damages from doesn't have insurance and nor do they have the means to pay

This is not the case here. Our neighbour certainly does have the means to pay as he has both income and wealth. Whether he has any sort of insurance I don't know, but is it relevant since the damage was clearly deliberate (and has naturally been recorded so by the Police)?

Would such an insurance policy which he has taken out, pay out for him, to us, if he committed a crime and it wasn't an accident? 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, keith2011 said:

 

How come the police did not arrest your neighbour for breaking and entering, or criminal damage? Seems there was plenty of evidence not to mention whatever might be on the camera.

Very good question.

The camera pointing at the area in question was only installed after the incident so he did not record himself. 

The break-in attempts were unsuccessful so there was no 'entering'. 

The Police told us to take the matter up with a lawyer (for financial compensation for the damage he caused). 

I was not aware that attempted break-ins and criminal damage were serious enough offences one can be arrested for there and then. 

They were on the verge of taking him away - possibly to put him in a psychiatric unit (owing to the fact he threatened to set light to the heating oil) - but after checking with their station, it was decided that he could stay as he promised not to do anything more!! 

After the Police went away he came down and damaged the heating, putting it out of service - and this was in March when it was still colder - it took over 8 weeks to get it fixed), then he left the building to go out, so when the Police came back he wasn't there to be arrested. :rolleyes: He wasn't even charged in the end for the incidents that caused the damage, - we had a letter saying the damage was minor (which of course for us it is not) and that it was not in the public interest to prosecute. :rolleyes: 

However the public prosecution have apparently now opened a new investigation as we complained that the incident had not been dealt with properly and he is still a total menace who has clearly been out of control for a long time now.

Though to us it is clear that in these cases both the Police and the other authorities that we have notified, in our case the town hall, are about as much use as a glass buttock and you're basically on your own in such circumstances. :rolleyes: 

I discussed the case with the public psychiatric services and they said it would probably take around 18 months (if ever) before he is actually carted away and put permanently into psychiatric care against his own will. Before something like that can happen there are thick layers of bureaucracy and assessments to get through. 

We set the ball rolling by reporting the incident to the Police and informing the mayor, who came out personally to speak to us about it - at which point I handed him a 4-page report of everything that the man had done to us up until that point. I've emailed the Police and the mayor weekly ever since. 

Whether anyone anywhere will do anything about him I don't know. I doubt it. I'll believe it when I see it. To me it seems you can get away with stuff here that you wouldn't elsewhere, which to me is an open invitation for the criminal activity merely to continue. :rolleyes:

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to ring my neighbor upstairs and thank him for the spy camera he used to voyeur on us (" " " wildlife " " ") because he involuntarily allowed me to read a lot of useful info on a topic I was totally ignorant about.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, lunaCH said:

If I understand correctly such a clause is used when the person you are claiming damages from doesn't have insurance and nor do they have the means to pay

This is not the case here. Our neighbour certainly does have the means to pay as he has both income and wealth

Then such insurance isn´t of much use. It´s for cases when you´re found to have a claim for damage compensation but the debtor can´t pay. Not sure whether they´d pay if the damage was done deliberately. Let´s ask @john g.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now